從同婚爭議論公共理性的完備性

On the Completeness of Public Reason in the Same-Sex Marriage Debate

10.7015/JEAS.202009_50(3).0002

吳澤玫(Tse-Mei Wu)

公共理性 ； 完備性 ； 同性婚姻 ； 羅爾斯 ； 道德妥協 ； public reason ； completeness ； same-sex marriage ； John Rawls ； moral compromise

歐美研究

50卷3期（2020 / 09 / 01）

523 - 569

繁體中文

羅爾斯主張公共理性是完備的，即根據共享的政治價值和推論方式做判斷，將可對具爭議的重要制度和法律得出合理答案。本文的目的是要從同性婚姻合法化的爭議，檢視公共理性的完備性意涵。筆者將指出，各種政治正義觀可能得出不同的政治價值合理排序，且公共理性觀無法解決「何謂婚姻？」這個背景問題的歧見，因此完備性不能理解為對爭議議題「達成共識」。在「達成可合理接受的制度方案」的意義下，公共理性的完備性則可成立。為此，必須在公共理性的基礎上補充民主多數決和立法的道德妥協。

Rawls claimed that public reason is complete; that is, it allows citizens to formulate a reasonable answer to controversial institutions and laws through judgments that appeal to shared political values and reasoning methods. The aim of this paper is to examine the meaning of the completeness of public reason by discussing the dispute over the legalization of same-sex marriage. I will point out that various political conceptions of justice may lead to different, reasonable, orderings of political values. Moreover, the conception of public reason cannot resolve the background question, ＂What is marriage?＂ Therefore, the meaning of the completeness of public reason cannot be understood as ＂achieving consensus＂ on controversial issues. Public reason is complete in the sense of ＂achieving an institutional solution that can be reasonably accepted.＂ To this end, it is necessary to supplement the democratic majority and legislative moral compromise based on ideals of public reason.

1. 陳宗憶, T. I(2018)。憲法第 22 條之詮釋——以司法院釋字第 748 號解釋為例。法令月刊，69(4)，84-98。
   連結：
2. Adams, J.,Light, R.(2015).Scientific consensus, the law, and same sex parenting outcomes.Social Science Research,53,300-310.
3. Beckwith, F. J.(2013).Justificatory liberalism and same-sex marriage.Ratio Juris,26(4),487-509.
4. Brake, E.(2010).Minimal marriage: What political liberalism implies for marriage law.Ethics,120(2),302-337.
5. Brake, E. (2016). Marriage and domestic partnership. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/marriage
6. de Marneffe, P.(1994).Rawls’s idea of public reason.Pacific Philosophical Quarterly,75(3/4),232-250.
7. Finnis, J.(1997).The good of marriage and the morality of sexual relations: Some philosophical and historical observations.The American Journal of Jurisprudence,42(1),97-134.
8. Freeman, S.(2007).Justice and the social contract: Essays on Rawlsian political philosophy.New York:Oxford University Press.
9. Freeman, S.(Ed.)(1999).John Rawls: Collected papers.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
10. George, R. P.(1997).Public reason and political conflict: Abortion and homosexuality.The Yale Law Journal,106(8),2475-2504.
11. George, R. P.(Ed.),Wolfe, C.(Ed.)(2000).Natural law and public reason.Washington, DC:Georgetown University Press.
12. Girgis, S.,Anderson, R. T.,George, R. P.(2012).What is marriage?: Man and woman: A defense.New York:Encounter Books.
13. Gutmann, A.,Thompson, D.(2014).The spirit of compromise: Why governing demands it and campaigning undermines it.Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
14. Horton, J.(2003).Rawls, public reason and the limits of liberal justification.Contemporary Political Theory,2,5-23.
15. Lister, A.(2013).Public reason and political community.London:Bloomsbury Academic.
16. Macedo, S.(2015).Just married: Same-sex couples, monogamy & the future of marriage.Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
17. Munoz‐Dardé, V.(1998).Rawls, justice in the family and justice of the family.Philosophical Quarterly,48(192),335-352.
18. Nussbaum, M. C.(2010).From disgust to humanity: Sexual orientation and constitutional law.New York:Oxford University Press.
19. Quinn, P. L.(1995).Political liberalisms and their exclusions of the religious.Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association,69(2),35-56.
20. Quong, J.(2011).Liberalism without perfection.Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
21. Quong, J. (2018). Public reason. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/public-reason/
22. Rawls, J.(1996).Political liberalism.New York:Columbia University Press.
23. Rawls, J.(1971).A theory of justice.Cambridge, MA:The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
24. Rawls, J.(1993).Political liberalism.New York:Columbia University Press.
25. Reidy, D. A.(2000).Rawls’s wide view of public reason: Not wide enough.Res Publica,6(1),49-72.
26. Saletan, W. (2012, June 11). Back in the gay: Does a new study indict gay parenthood or make a case for gay marriage?. Slate. Retrieved from https://slate.com/technology/2012/06/new-family-structures-study-is-gay-parenthood-bad-or-is-gay-marriage-good.html
27. Sandel, M. J.(2009).Justice: What’s the right thing to do?.New York:Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
28. Schwartzman, M.(2004).The completeness of public reason.Politics, Philosophy & Economics,3(2),191-220.
29. Sullivan, A. (1989, August 28). Here comes the groom: A (conservative) case for gay marriage. The New Republic. Retrieved from https://newrepublic.com/article/79054/here-comes-the-groom
30. Sullivan, A.(Ed. Intro.)(2004).Same-sex marriage: Pro and con: A reader.New York:Vintage Books.
31. Sunstein, C. R.(2014).Conspiracy theories and other dangerous ideas.New York:Simon & Schuster.
32. Wedgwood, R.(1999).The fundamental argument for same-sex marriage.Journal of Political Philosophy,7(3),225-242.
33. Wellington, A. A.(1995).Why liberals should support same sex marriage.Journal of Social Philosophy,26(3),5-32.
34. Williams, A.(2000).The alleged incompleteness of public reason.Res Publica,6(2),199-211.
35. Young, I. M.(1990).Justice and the politics of difference.Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
36. 司法院大法官 (2017)。〈釋字第 748 號【同性二人婚姻自由案】〉。取自 http://cons.judicial.gov.tw/jcc/zh-tw/jep03/show?expno=748(Constitutional Court of the Judicial Yuan. [2017]. Interpretation No. 748 “same-sex marriage case.”)
37. 立法院 (2019)。〈司法院釋字第七四八號解釋暨公投第十二案施行法草案〉。取自 https://lis.ly.gov.tw/lygazettec/mtcdoc?DN090712:LCEWA01_090712_10437 (Legislative Yuan. [2019]. The draft law of enforcement act of the J. Y. interpretation No. 748 and 12th case of referendum.)
38. 柯志明, C. M.(2016).無所謂「同性婚姻」：婚姻的本性與價值.新北市=New Taipei City:橄欖=Olive Press.
39. 柯志明 (2017)。〈用心讕言：讀司法院大法官釋字第 748 號解釋文〉。取自 http://taiwan-christians.blogspot.tw/2017/05/748.html#more (Ka, C. M. [2017]. Sincere advice: Read the J. Y. interpretation No. 748.)
40. 陳美華（編）, M. H.(ed.),王秀雲（編）, H. Y.(ed.),黃于玲（編）, Y. L.(ed.)(2018).欲望性公民：同性親密公民權讀本.高雄=Kaohsiung:巨流=Chuliu.
41. 戴伯芬（編）, P. F.(ed.)(2017).性別作為動詞：巷仔口社會學 2.新北市=New Taipei City:大家出版=Common Master Press.